Erik Conwayhttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/5080/all
enHow To Spot A Fake Grassroots Movementhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/18/how-spot-fake-grassroots-movement
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/morans.jpg?itok=ZpotFbR3" width="200" height="195" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span class="caps">PERHAPS</span> somebody should write a pocket guide book with the title: “How to spot you've been suckered by a fake grassroots movement”.</p>
<p>Once it's written, these guide books could be distributed free of charge to crowds at anti-carbon tax rallies, <span class="caps">US</span> Tea Party marches and pretty much any gathering of a “movement” telling you that you're freedom is being put at risk by big governments, nanny states, new world orders or communists disguised as climate scientists or public health professionals.</p>
<p>But why the sudden need for the guide?</p>
<p>There's now emerging evidence that if these really are “grassroots” movements, then many of the seeds and the fertilisers are being supplied by major corporations and “libertarian” billionaires. It turns out that the <span class="caps">US</span> Tea Party movement and its calls for “freedom” from government intervention wasn't some organic uprising of community concern after all.</p>
<p>A new academic study documents how the Tea Party was envisioned and planned by tobacco company executives in concert with Citizens for a Sound Economy, a group established by oil billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch.</p>
<p>As reported on <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/11/study-confirms-tea-party-was-created-big-tobacco-and-billionaires" target="_blank">DeSmogBlog</a>, the study “<a href="http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2013/02/07/tobaccocontrol-2012-050815.abstract" target="_blank">‘To quarterback behind the scenes, third-party efforts’: the tobacco industry and the Tea Party</a>” shows how the industry wanted to hide their profit motive and fear of the government regulating their deadly products behind a “movement to change the way that people think”, as R.J Reynolds Tobacco's head of national field operations Tim Hyde described it.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>Two groups were spawned from Citizens for a Sound Economy. As DeSmogBlog's Brendan DeMelle reports: “Freedomworks and Americans for Prosperity are both multi-issue organizations that have expanded their battles to include other policies they see as threats to the free market principles they claim to defend, namely fighting health care reform and regulations on global warming pollution.”</p>
<p>The judicious 2010 book “<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41292.html" target="_blank">Merchants of Doubt</a>”, by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, also documented how a small group of scientists and “free market” ideologues had spread doubt on research linking tobacco to cancer and how some of those scientists were now operating in the climate science denial industry.</p>
<p>Also in recent weeks, more detail has emerged of the money trail linking groups across the <span class="caps">US</span> who run projects to block government regulation of greenhouse gas pollution or misrepresent (or outright deny) the many decades of science linking climate change to human activity.</p>
<p>In February last year, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/how-heartland-style-climate-sceptic-campaigns-play-hide-deniers-using-secretive-fund" target="_blank">DeSmogBlog</a> wrote of a secretive Virginia-based trust fund which was acting as a middleman for rich conservatives to hide their funding of projects blocking action on climate change and denying the science. The Donors Capital Fund and its partner organisation <a href="http://donorstrust.org/" target="_blank">Donors Trust</a> were funnelling millions of dollars into climate denial projects across the <span class="caps">US</span>.</p>
<p>Since then, <span class="caps">PBS</span> Frontline documentary “<a href="http://video.pbs.org/video/2295533310">Climate of Doubt</a>” has also covered the role which Donors Trust and <span class="caps">DCF</span> have played in funding climate science denial projects, which include documentary films, “education” materials, report writing campaigns and lobbying. The <span class="caps">UK</span>'s <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-billionaires-secretly-fund-attacks-on-climate-science-8466312.html" target="_blank">The Independent</a> newspaper recently reported how the “Knowledge and Progress Fund”, a group established by Charles Koch, had given at least $4.5 million to Donors Trust since 2007.</p>
<p>Now <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reveals the true extent of Donors Trust and <span class="caps">DCF</span>'s funding of the climate denial movement which, the newspaper reports, has bankrolled a vast network of think-tanks with climate denial projects. The Competitive Enterprise Institute, Americans for Prosperity, American Enterprise Foundation, the Cato Institute and the Heartland Institute are just some of the organisations which have each received millions of dollars from <span class="caps">DCF</span> or Donors Trust since 2002. <a href="http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2013/02/15/revealed-donors-trust-is-the-secret-atm-machine-for-climate-deniers/" target="_blank">Greenpeace</a> has analysed the tax forms of Donors Trust and <span class="caps">DCF</span> and finds it has funnelled $146 million into the climate science denial industry between 2002 and 2011.</p>
<p>One major beneficiary has been the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (<span class="caps">CFACT</span>) which has received more than $4 million from <span class="caps">DCF</span> or Donors Trust since 2002. The latest <a href="http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org//990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_201112_990.pdf" target="_blank">990 tax forms show that Donors Trust</a> gave $1.19 million to <span class="caps">CFACT</span> in 2011, mostly for “general operations” or the group's “environmental education fund”. In return, <span class="caps">CFACT</span> tax records show it returned $300,000 to Donors Trust in 2011.</p>
<p><span class="caps">CFACT</span>'s highest profile operators are <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/12/27/climate-change-misinformer-of-the-year-marc-mor/191878" target="_blank">Marc Morano</a>, the organisation's director of communications who maintains the Climate Depot denial blog, and climate science denial poster boy Lord Christopher Monckton.</p>
<p>Lord Monckton has been part of <span class="caps">CFACT</span> delegations, often with Morano by his side, at United Nations climate and environment conferences including Rio, Doha, Cancun, Durban, Copenhagen and Bonn. Lord Monckton has also been a favourite of local Tea Party groups in the <span class="caps">US</span> who have sponsored lectures across America where Lord Monckton has claimed global warming is a socialist plot to take over the world and that President Obama's Hawaiin birth certificate was probably faked.</p>
<p>Currently on one of his regular speaking tours across Australia, Lord Monckton has most recently <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/13/climate-science-denier-lord-monckton-joins-creationist-pastor-launch-extremist-political-party" target="_blank">helped to launch an extremist Australian political party</a> fronted by an anti-Islamic, creationist pastor.</p>
<p>The long arm of the Koch's fake grassroots movement also reached Australia in the form of Tim Andrews who took part in the Koch Associate Program, describing it thus - “an intense year-long training program by the Charles Koch Institute to train a select group of activists to become more efficient agents for change”.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/7243323/meet-the-man-behind-the-anticarbon-tax-lobby/" target="_blank">The Spectator</a> magazine identified Andrews as the “mastermind” behind the anti-science, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/australia-gets-price-carbon-despite-toxic-anti-science-campaign" target="_blank">anti-carbon tax rallies held across Australia</a> in what was a failed attempt to stop legislation to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions. Mr Andrews has now founded the Australian Taxpayer's Alliance with Cato Institute climate sceptic Pat Michaels as an advisor.</p>
<p>Then there is the American Legislative Exchange Council - an organisation which has received heavy funding from Koch brothers groups over the years. The Koch company also has a seat on the <span class="caps">ALEC</span> board alongside other corporates such as coal giant Peabody and oil company Exxon. A core of <span class="caps">ALEC</span>'s operation is to draft model bills which legislators can drop into statehouses. <span class="caps">ALEC</span>'s 2013 effort includes a bill to repeal any state laws which might have mandated that electricity supplies contain a fixed percentage from renewable energies. Their latest success is a bill <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/01/31/three-states-pushing-alec-bill-climate-change-denial-schools" target="_blank">mandating the teaching of climate science in school classrooms</a>, which has gained support in three states.</p>
<p>Documents from <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/15/idUS297741396920120315" target="_blank">climate science denial group the Heartland Institute</a> ($14 million from Donors Trust and <span class="caps">DCF</span>) showed it too was targeting school children. A plan was to pay a former coal power consultant to write a new school curriculum to focus on teaching children that human caused climate change was a scientific “controversy”. The Heartland documents also showed how Australian climate sceptic Professor Bob Carter, science advisor to Melbourne-based “free market” think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, would be <a href="http://www.readfearn.com/2012/02/bob-carter-responds-to-heartland-leak/" target="_blank">paid $1667 a month by Heartland</a> to edit a climate change report.</p>
<p>So how to spot these fake “grassroots” movements?</p>
<p>One tip to go into our imaginary “pocket guide” might be to red flag any repeated use of the word “freedom” and the surely positive advocation of “free markets” or a “free society”. These value-laden terms are often co-opted by industry-funded think-tanks fighting regulation in their industry.</p>
<p>Before lining up with their “freedom” placards, would-be marchers might want to first ask themselves who are the real beneficiaries when governments are stripped of their power to regulate the activities of major corporations.</p>
<p>Is this version of “freedom” really for the benefit of the people, or is it more about freedom for major corporations to indiscriminately pollute, freedom to market cancer sticks, freedom to buy politicians, freedom to secretly lobby, freedom to write your own laws, freedom to use tax havens, freedom to teach climate science denial to kids, freedom from taxes, freedom for the rich to get richer and freedom to put our health and security at risk from climate change?</p>
</div></div></div><!-- iCopyright Horizontal Tag -->
<div class="icopyright-article-tools-horizontal icopyright-article-tools-left">
<script type="text/javascript">
var icx_publication_id = 14813;
var icx_content_id = '6891';
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/rights/js/horz-toolbar.js"></script>
<noscript>
<a class="icopyright-article-tools-noscript"
href="http://license.icopyright.net/3.14813?icx_id=6891"
target="_blank"
title="Main menu of all reuse options">
<img height="25" width="27" border="0" align="bottom"
alt="[Reuse options]"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/images/icopy-w.png"/>
Click here for reuse options!
</a>
</noscript>
</div>
<!-- iCopyright Tag -->
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4953">tea party</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4902">Charles Koch</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1251">tobacco</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12090">reynolds</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/591">christopher monckton</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8474">lord Monckton</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12061">rise up australia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8475">Donors Trust</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8476">Donors Capital Fund</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8525">DCF</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5081">Merchants of Doubt</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/naomi-oreskes">naomi oreskes</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5080">Erik Conway</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4903">David Koch</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1800">koch industries</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12091">kochs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3062">climate denial</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/821">Heartland Institute</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2427">heartland</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6853">ALEC</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/ipa">IPA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/institute-of-public-affairs">Institute of Public Affairs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/622">bob carter</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1196">marc morano</a></div></div></div>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 06:15:16 +0000Graham Readfearn6891 at http://www.desmogblog.comSmoke and Mirrors: Obama DOE Fracked Gas Export Study Contractor's Tobacco Industry Rootshttp://www.desmogblog.com/2013/01/24/doe-lng-export-study-contractor-tobacco-industry-roots
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_33475687.jpg?itok=OeUHwGI-" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>At first, it was kept secret for months, cryptically referred to only as an “<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49065604/ns/business-oil_and_energy/t/energy-department-delays-release-lng-export-report/#.UQB44KHvl8w">unidentified third-party contractor</a>.”</p>
<p>Finally, in November 2012, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/19/revealed-reuters-ids-nera-economic-consulting-third-party-contractor-doe-lng-export-study"><em>Reuters </em>revealed</a> the name of the corporate consulting firm the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Department of Energy (<span class="caps">DOE</span>) hired to produce a study on the prospective economic impacts of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7345">liquefied natural gas</a> (<span class="caps">LNG</span>) exports.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nationofchange.org/unpacking-shale-gas-lng-export-boom-1333374157"><span class="caps">LNG</span> is the super-chilled final product</a> of gas obtained - predominatly in today's context - via the controversial <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future/">hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”)</a> process taking place within <a href="ftp://ftp.eia.doe.gov/natgas/usshaleplays.pdf">shale deposits located throughout the <span class="caps">U.S.</span></a> This “prize” is shipped from the multitude of domestic shale basins in <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/america-s-natural-gas-pipelines-closer-look-gigantic-pipeline-system">pipelines</a> to various <a href="http://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/indus-act/lng/LNG-proposed-potential.pdf">coastal <span class="caps">LNG</span> terminals</a>, and then <a href="http://www.nationofchange.org/unpacking-shale-gas-lng-export-boom-1333374157">sent on <span class="caps">LNG</span> tankers to the global market</a>. </p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The firm: </span><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/19/revealed-reuters-ids-nera-economic-consulting-third-party-contractor-doe-lng-export-study" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">National Economic Research Associates</a><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> (<span class="caps">NERA</span>) Economic Consulting, has a long history of pushing for deregulation. Its claim to fame: the </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">deregulation </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“studies” it publishes on behalf of the nuclear, coal, and oil/gas industry - and as it turns out, Big Tobacco, too.</span></p>
<!--break-->
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Alfred E. Kahn</span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">, the late “<a href="http://news.cornell.edu/stories/Dec10/KahnObit.html">Father of Deregulation</a>,” founded <span class="caps">NERA</span> in 1961 along with </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.hudson.org/learn/index.cfm?fuseaction=staff_bio&amp;eid=StelIrwi">Irwin Stelzer</a>, now a senior fellow and director of the right-wing <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hudson_Institute">Hudson Institute</a>’s Center for Economic Policy. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The <a href="http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/gasregulation/LNGStudy.html"><span class="caps">NERA</span>/Obama <span class="caps">DOE</span> <span class="caps">LNG</span> export economic impact study</a>, released in early-December 2012, concluded that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/24/business/energy-environment/excelerate-energy-aims-to-be-a-leader-in-natural-gas.html?_r=0">exporting the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> shale gas bounty</a> is in the best economic interest of the country. The commenting period for that study <a href="http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/gasregulation/authorizations/export_study/export_study_initial_comments.html">closes today at 4:30 <span class="caps">PM</span> <span class="caps">EST</span></a>. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">This conclusion drew metaphorical hisses from many analysts, including prominent shale gas market economist and former Wall Street investor </span><a href="http://energypolicyforum.org/about-us/deborah/" style="color: rgb(255, 205, 51);">Deborah Rogers</a><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">, who now maintains the blog <a href="http://energypolicyforum.org/about-us/"><em>Energy Policy Forum</em></a>. Her critique cut straight to the very foundation of the study itself, <a href="http://energypolicyforum.org/2012/12/06/department-of-energy-new-reports-on-exportation/">stating</a> that “</span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">economic model[s] are only as good as their inputs.” </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">She <a href="http://energypolicyforum.org/2012/12/06/department-of-energy-new-reports-on-exportation/">proceeded to explain</a>,</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">In fact, it is neither difficult nor unusual for models to be designed to favor one outcome over another. In other words, models can be essentially reverse engineered. This is especially true when the models have been commissioned by industries that stand to gain significantly in monetary terms. Or government agencies which are perhaps pushing a political agenda.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Beyond its <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/19/revealed-reuters-ids-nera-economic-consulting-third-party-contractor-doe-lng-export-study">history working as a hired gun for the fossil fuel industry</a>, <span class="caps">NERA</span> also has deeper historical roots producing “smoke and mirrors” studies on behalf of the tobacco industry. </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The long view of the firm's past is something <span class="caps">NERA</span> would likely rather see “go up in smoke,” forever buried in the historical annals. But that would be a disservice to <span class="caps">U.S.</span> taxpayers since <span class="caps">NERA</span> continues to receive government contracts to produce tobacco-era disinformation to this day. </span></p>
<h3>
<span class="caps">NERA</span> and the “Tobacco Playbook”</h3>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Many fossil fuel industry public relations flacks learned the tactics of mass manipulation by reading the “tobacco playbook,” meticulously documented in Naomi Oreskes' and Erik Conway's classic book, “</span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1608193942" style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Merchants of Doubt</a><span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">.” </span></h3>
<p>“<a href="http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/332506.html">Doubt is our product</a>,” a tobacco industry <span class="caps">CEO</span> once said of the playbook, “since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.”<span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span></p>
<h3>
<span class="caps">NERA</span> Health “Benefits” of Smoking</h3>
<p>The <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/">University of California-San Francisco's Tobacco Archives</a> reveal <span class="caps">NERA</span> worked on behalf of the tobacco industry dating back at least to 1986.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hfk95a00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22">May memo</a> from that year written by then <a href="http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2506&amp;dat=19840421&amp;id=P4BJAAAAIBAJ&amp;sjid=qgsNAAAAIBAJ&amp;pg=2039,6575993"><span class="caps">NERA</span> Vice President</a> <a href="http://www.hudson.org/learn/index.cfm?fuseaction=staff_bio&amp;eid=ShewW">William B. Shew</a> (who now works at the previously mentioned Hudson Institute as an Adjunct Fellow alongside <span class="caps">NERA</span> Founder, Irwin Stelzer) addressed to <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arnold_%26_Porter">Arnold <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Porter</a> attorney Thomas Silfen says the tobacco industry should aim to explain the so-called health “benefits” of smoking.</p>
<p>Most studies don't explain “the satisfactions that induce smokers to put up with health hazards,” <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hfk95a00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22">Shew explains in the memo</a>. “This imbalance would be rectified by looking at the satisfaction derived from smoking.”</p>
<p>At the time of the internal memo's publication, Arnold <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Porter served as national counsel for Philip Morris.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://archive.tobacco.org/news/107164.html">memo published in 1988 by Silfen</a> posits that Big Tobacco has an obligation going forward to overcome its “long agony over health issues–to get the industry out of the 'it hasn't been proven' trap once and for all.”</p>
<h3>
Attempt to Defeat L.A.'s Restaurant Smoking Ban </h3>
<p>Working alongside public relations industry giant <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ogilvy_%26_Mather">Ogilvy-Mather</a> and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Tobacco_Institute">Tobacco Institute</a>, <span class="caps">NERA</span> also attempted to <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/spl44b00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22">defeat the then-proposed smoking ban in Los Angeles County in 1990</a>, the Tobacco Archives reveal. </p>
<p><em>SourceWatch</em> details that the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ogilvy_%26_Mather#Tobacco_industry_ties">Tobacco Institute hired Ogilvy</a> “to provide public affairs consulting services aimed at helping the Instutitute fight cigarette excise taxes, public smoking restrictions and to help with coalition building issues,” <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ogilvy_%26_Mather#Tobacco_industry_ties">proceeding to explain</a> that it helped to “devise ad campaigns to take the public's focus off the health hazards of secondhand tobacco smoke.”</p>
<p>Among other accolades, Ogilvy helped <span class="caps">BP</span> rebrand itself ”<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=BP_and_Greenwashing">Beyond Petroluem</a>,” a propaganda campaign which won the corporation now <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/U.S._Government_Cover-Up_of_Deepwater_Horizon_Oil_Spill">infamous for its Gulf Coast oil disaster</a> the <a href="http://www.prweekus.com/pr-week-awards-2001-campaign--brand-development-campaign-of-the-year-2001-sponsored-by-on-the-scene-productions/article/40290/"><em><span class="caps">PR</span> Week</em> “Brand of the Year” in 2001</a>. Critics at the time called it a case of “<a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=219">greenwashing</a>.” </p>
<p>Yet in the end, it was a case of “too little, too late” for <span class="caps">NERA</span>, Ogilvy and the Tobacco Institute. </p>
<p>In 1990, San Luis Obispo, <span class="caps">CA</span> “became the first city in the world to ban indoor smoking at all public places, including bars and restaurants,” <a href="http://blog.sfgate.com/hleon/2012/06/04/a-brief-history-of-smoking-bans/">according to the <em>San Francisco Gate</em></a>. By 1998, California adopted these regulations as the <a href="http://blog.sfgate.com/hleon/2012/06/04/a-brief-history-of-smoking-bans/">law of the land statewide</a>.</p>
<h3>
<span class="caps">NERA</span> Offers Philip Morris Advertising Analytics</h3>
<div>
In 1992, tobacco giant<span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Philip Morris hired </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><span class="caps">NERA</span></span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qxc42e00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">to analyze whether cigarette advertisements made an impact on consumption habits</a><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">. This came during a time when the industry faced <a href="http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&amp;context=richard_pollay">sharp scrunity for whitewashing the dangerous health impacts</a> of smoking in its ads. </span></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Given this premise, it's no shock <span class="caps">NERA</span> concluded that the concerns about the effectiveness of Big Tobacco's advertising charm offensive were overblown. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“The issue of whether cigarette advertising has had any effect on cigarette consumption per adult in Western countries over the last several decades remains uncertain,” <span class="caps">NERA</span> explained in the <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hlx92e00/pdf">lenghty report now posted on the Tobacco Archives</a>. “However, it seems clear that advertising has had at most a minor effect, if any, on consumption per adult.”</span></div>
<div>
</div>
<h3>
<span class="caps">NERA</span>/Philip Morris' War on <span class="caps">OSHA</span> and Maryland Workplace Smoking Regs </h3>
<p>Later, in 1994 and 1995, the Tobacco Archives also reveal that <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sgt49b00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22"><span class="caps">NERA</span> served as a contractor</a> for <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Altria_Group">Philip Morris (now owned by Altria Group)</a>, taking the fight to an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (<span class="caps">OSHA</span>) proposal to implement regulations for smoking on the job. </p>
<p><span class="caps">OSHA</span> proposed banning smoking everywhere within the workplace except for in small, desiginated and isolated lounges.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nera.com/Experts_expert83.htm" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em; color: rgb(255, 205, 51);">Dr. Albert L . Nichols</a> authored a Dec. 1995 <span class="caps">NERA</span> <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tbu30c00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22">economic study contracted out by Philip Morris which critiqued <span class="caps">OSHA</span> regulations</a>. That study predictably concluded that <span class="caps">OSHA</span>'s regulations were “draconian” in nature, suggesting <span class="caps">OSHA</span> relied on “patently ludicrous” economic assumptions.</p>
<p>While <span class="caps">NERA</span>/Philip Morris waged its battle against <span class="caps">OSHA</span>, <span class="caps">NERA</span> also devoted itself to fighting back against Maryland's state-level workplace smoking regulations.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mod50c00/pdf?search=%22national%20economic%20research%20associates%22">Feb. 1995 <em>Associated Press</em> article</a> quotes Nichols saying that cigarette sales in Maryland “could fall by $27 million” on an annual basis if the regulations are implemented.</p>
<p>Much to <span class="caps">NERA</span>'s chagrin, a month later, the <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Maryland-Bans-Smoking-in-Workplace-Only-3043840.php">proposed regulations became Maryland state law</a>.</p>
<h3>
Should Firm with Big Tobacco Roots Be Trusted?</h3>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The </span><em style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Sierra Club</em><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> is skeptical of the Obama <span class="caps">DOE</span>'s choice of <span class="caps">NERA</span> as the contractor to perform the fracked gas <span class="caps">LNG</span> export study. The Club just </span><a href="http://www.sierraclub.org/pressroom/downloads/Freedom-Information-Act-Request-LNG-Export-Studies.pdf" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">filed a Freedom of Information Act request</a><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> to ascertain exactly how the Department went about choosing <span class="caps">NERA</span> for its “study” that will play a large part in shaping the future of global energy markets.</span></p>
<p>“Deciding to export the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> gas supply is a major public decision,” Deb Nardone, director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Natural Gas Campaign, <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/121687044/Sierra-Club-Investigates-Department-of-Energy%E2%80%99s-Economic-Study-on-Natural-Gas-Exports">said in a press release</a>. “We deserve a full and fair conversation about it. That’s why we deserve to know how and why <span class="caps">DOE</span> picked this anti-environmental, pro-corporate consultant for this crucial report.”</p>
<p>With easily apparent deep-seated roots dating back to the halcyon days of Big Tobacco, the <span class="caps">DOE</span>'s <span class="caps">NERA</span> selection begs the question: Can one view the <span class="caps">NERA</span>/Obama <span class="caps">DOE</span> economic findings on <span class="caps">LNG</span> exports as anything but a deeply cynical <span class="caps">PR</span> ploy?</p>
<p><strong>Update (5:33 <span class="caps">PM</span> <span class="caps">CST</span>)</strong>: Over 200,000 public comments were delivered to the <span class="caps">DOE</span>, according to a <a href="http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/01/over-200000-public-comments-delivered-department-energy-criticizing-flawed"><em>Sierra Club</em> press release</a>. “The public should be outraged to hear that domestic supplies of gas would be shipped overseas and that households which rely on a paycheck will see no benefit, which is clearly stated in the report,” <a href="http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/01/over-200000-public-comments-delivered-department-energy-criticizing-flawed">said Nardone</a>. “Most Americans rely on a paycheck. Meanwhile communities all across the country are left footing the bill to clean up contaminated water supplies and with increased medical bills due to air pollution. Exporting fracked gas is clearly not in the best interest of the United States. <span class="caps">DOE</span> and President Obama must not accept this flawed study.” <br /><br /><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Photo Credit: </span><a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&amp;search_source=search_form&amp;version=llv1&amp;anyorall=all&amp;safesearch=1&amp;searchterm=lng+tanker&amp;search_group=#id=33475687&amp;src=4a7ee09ba8c14a4e25cc58c1855fd572-1-5" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">ShutterStock</a><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> | </span><a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-87646p1.html" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Oleksandr Kalinichenko</a></p>
</div></div></div><!-- iCopyright Horizontal Tag -->
<div class="icopyright-article-tools-horizontal icopyright-article-tools-left">
<script type="text/javascript">
var icx_publication_id = 14813;
var icx_content_id = '6830';
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/rights/js/horz-toolbar.js"></script>
<noscript>
<a class="icopyright-article-tools-noscript"
href="http://license.icopyright.net/3.14813?icx_id=6830"
target="_blank"
title="Main menu of all reuse options">
<img height="25" width="27" border="0" align="bottom"
alt="[Reuse options]"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/images/icopy-w.png"/>
Click here for reuse options!
</a>
</noscript>
</div>
<!-- iCopyright Tag -->
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11763">Hudson Institute Center for Economic Policy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11736">DOE LNG Export Study</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11780">Obama DOE</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/666">Sierra Club</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2176">foia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11764">Albert L . Nichols</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11092">National Economic Research Associates</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5578">Freedom of Information Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11765">Altria Group</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11766">Deb Nardone</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11753">Sierra Club Beyond Natural Gas Campaign</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11767">California Restaurant Smoking Ban</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11768">Maryland Smoking Ban</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11769">Ogilvy-Mather</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1432">tobacco institute</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/sourcewatch">sourcewatch</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1267">big oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8655">King Coal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9571">Big Gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2398">big tobacco</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1002">bp</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/philip-morris">Philip Morris</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8227">AP</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1278">Associated Press</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11770">Beyond Petroluem</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11771">PR Week 2001 Brand of the Year</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1882">greenwashing</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11772">Thomas Silfen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11773">Arnold &amp; Porter</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6233">Fossil Fuel</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5086">PR</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/public-relations">Public Relations</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11774">Our Product Is Doubt</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/hudson-institute">Hudson Institute</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11078">NERA Economic Consulting</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5080">Erik Conway</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2800">natural gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8931">unconventional oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6344">unconventional gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11775">William B. Shew</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11776">Tobacco Archives</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11777">University of California-San Francisco</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11778">Irwin Stelzer</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5081">Merchants of Doubt</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6639">LNG</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7345">Liquefied Natural Gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5565">shale gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7277">shale oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5137">hydraulic fracturing</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11779">Energy Policy Forum</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11662">Tobacco industry</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10853">Tobacco Playbook</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/naomi-oreskes">naomi oreskes</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11297">Deborah Rogers</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8071">wall street</a></div></div></div>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:26:54 +0000Steve Horn6830 at http://www.desmogblog.comClimate Change Denial Isn't About Science, or Even Skepticismhttp://www.desmogblog.com/climate-change-denial-isn-t-about-science-or-even-skepticism
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/David%20Suzuki_0.png?itok=xsdXD3ni" width="132" height="143" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><em>Cross-posted from the <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2012/03/climate-change-denial-isnt-about-science-or-even-skepticism/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=twitter&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DavidSuzukiFoundation-ScienceMatters+%28David+Suzuki+Foundation+-+Science+Matters%29">David Suzuki Foundation's Science Matters blog</a>. By David Suzuki with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Editorial and Communications Specialist Ian Hanington.</em><br /><br />
Let's suppose the world's legitimate scientific institutions and academies, climate scientists, and most of the world's governments are wrong.</p>
<p>Maybe, as some people have argued, they're involved in a massive conspiracy to impose a socialist world order. Maybe the money's just too damn good. It doesn't matter. Let's just imagine they're wrong, and that the polar ice caps aren't melting and the climate isn't changing. Or, if you prefer, that it's happening, but that it's a natural occurrence — nothing to do with seven billion people spewing carbon dioxide and other pollutants into the atmosphere.</p>
<p>Would it still make sense to continue rapidly burning the world's diminishing supply of fossil fuels? Does it mean we shouldn't worry about pollution?</p>
<!--break-->
<p>We could pretend global warming isn't happening, or that humans aren't a factor if it is. That would be crazy in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but even if it weren't, there would still be no reason to continue down the road we're on. Energy is at the heart of modern society's needs, but when the source is finite, it seems folly to be hell-bent on using it up in a few generations, leaving the problems of depletion and pollution to our children and grandchildren. The longer we delay<a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/issues/climate-change/projects/trottier-energy-futures-project/"> implementing solutions to our energy challenges</a> the more costly and difficult it will be when we have to face the inevitable.</p>
<p>So, why do so many people insist that we remain stuck with outdated and destructive systems and technologies? Why do so many try to throw roadblocks in the way of progress and solutions? And what can we do about it?</p>
<p>Many books and studies have addressed the first two questions, including <a href="http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org/">Merchants of Doubt</a> by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, and <a href="http://desmogblog.com/climate-cover-up">Climate Cover-Up</a>, by James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore. Those show that huge sums of corporate money have been spent on campaigns to sow doubt and confusion about issues ranging from the dangers of smoking to threats to the ozone layer to climate change. It's all about protecting corporate profits and interests. That doesn't explain why so many ordinary people buy the industry spin, but a number of theories have attempted to <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-conservative-white-maes-are-more-likely-climate-skeptics">shed light on that phenomenon</a>.</p>
<p>What's important, though, is for those of us who rely on facts rather than spin to look at solutions. We can all do much more to reduce our environmental footprints, but the problem has grown so much that large-scale efforts are needed, and many of these must come from decision-makers in industry, government, and academia. However, there appears to be reluctance in some of those circles to act unless the public demands it. And so it's up to all of us to become informed. Then we can hold our leaders to account and challenge those who refuse to see the big picture.</p>
<p>This public responsibility is especially important in light of stepped-up efforts to deny the reality of climate change or the role humans play in it. Cases in point are illustrated by the <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2012/02/documents-strike-at-heart-of-denial-machine-documents-strike-at-heart-of-denial-/">denialgate</a> scandal revealed by the release of Heartland Institute documents and the revelation that Ottawa's Carleton University <a href="http://desmogblog.com/fake-heartland-scientist-infiltrates-canadian-university">hired Tom Harris</a>, a <span class="caps">PR</span> man for a number of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Astroturf">astroturf</a> groups with a mechanical engineering background, to teach a course on climate change.</p>
<p>There are many credible sources of information, and they aren't blog sites run by weathermen like Anthony Watts or industry-funded fake science organizations. One place to start is at <a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php">skepticalscience.com</a>. Click on the tab that says “Arguments” for scientific responses to all the main climate change denier talking points.</p>
<p>Another great rebuttal to the deniers came in a <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/mar/22/why-global-warming-skeptics-are-wrong/">recent article in the New York Review of Books by Yale University economics professor William D. Nordhaus</a>. He said his article, “Why the Global Warming Skeptics Are Wrong”, was “primarily designed to correct their misleading description of my own research; but it also is directed more broadly at their attempt to discredit scientists and scientific research on climate change.”</p>
<p>The misrepresentation of Nordhaus's research is typical of the Orwellian doublespeak deniers employ, but scientists and researchers are calling them on it.</p>
<p>Armed with credible information, we can challenge those who misrepresent science and spread confusion. If nothing else, we'll be able to breathe easier!</p>
</div></div></div><!-- iCopyright Horizontal Tag -->
<div class="icopyright-article-tools-horizontal icopyright-article-tools-left">
<script type="text/javascript">
var icx_publication_id = 14813;
var icx_content_id = '6124';
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/rights/js/horz-toolbar.js"></script>
<noscript>
<a class="icopyright-article-tools-noscript"
href="http://license.icopyright.net/3.14813?icx_id=6124"
target="_blank"
title="Main menu of all reuse options">
<img height="25" width="27" border="0" align="bottom"
alt="[Reuse options]"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/images/icopy-w.png"/>
Click here for reuse options!
</a>
</noscript>
</div>
<!-- iCopyright Tag -->
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/climate-change-skeptics">climate change skeptics</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/naomi-oreskes">naomi oreskes</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/731">david suzuki foundation</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/821">Heartland Institute</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/838">tom harris</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1170">David Suzuki</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3062">climate denial</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3350">Anthony Watts</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4463">astroturf</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5017">Peter Gleick</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5080">Erik Conway</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5081">Merchants of Doubt</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8423">denialgate</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8593">ian hanington</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8594">william nordhaus</a></div></div></div>Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:59:13 +0000Guest6124 at http://www.desmogblog.comOreskes, Conway exposing the Merchants of Doubthttp://www.desmogblog.com/oreskes-conway-exposing-merchants-doubt
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Merchants%20of%20Doubt.jpg?itok=buSAHD0-" width="200" height="200" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Oreskes">Naomi Oreskes</a>, professor of history and science studies at the University of California, San Diego, and Erik Conway, an historian at <span class="caps">NASA</span>’s Jet Propulsion Lab are stumping about these days in support of their excellent new book, <em><a href="http://www.amazon.ca/Merchants-Doubt-Naomi-Oreskes/dp/1596916109">Merchants of Doubt</a>.</em></p>
<p>As you might expect from someone with Oreskes’ exemplary background, <em>Merchants </em>is a painstakingly careful review of the climate change denial campaign. She and Conway have traced the whole, odious action back to the late 1980s and the early work of the George C. Marshall Institute, which they aregue convincingly was ground zero for the denial industry.</p>
<p>For a taste quick taste of their position, check this<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/06/07/oreskes.climate.change/"> <span class="caps">CNN</span> feature</a>.<!--break--></p></div></div></div><!-- iCopyright Horizontal Tag -->
<div class="icopyright-article-tools-horizontal icopyright-article-tools-left">
<script type="text/javascript">
var icx_publication_id = 14813;
var icx_content_id = '4693';
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/rights/js/horz-toolbar.js"></script>
<noscript>
<a class="icopyright-article-tools-noscript"
href="http://license.icopyright.net/3.14813?icx_id=4693"
target="_blank"
title="Main menu of all reuse options">
<img height="25" width="27" border="0" align="bottom"
alt="[Reuse options]"
src="http://license.icopyright.net/images/icopy-w.png"/>
Click here for reuse options!
</a>
</noscript>
</div>
<!-- iCopyright Tag -->
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/naomi-oreskes">naomi oreskes</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5080">Erik Conway</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5081">Merchants of Doubt</a></div></div></div>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:52:48 +0000Richard Littlemore4693 at http://www.desmogblog.com